>>518652304 (OP)
Yes, because reproductive economics are not the same between the sexes.
A woman, solely dedicated to the task of reproduction, will only be fertile for ~20 years.
This means she can produce AT MOST a couple dozen children or so.
Furthermore, pregnancy itself is a debilitating condition.
A pregnant woman cannot hunt, and will have a very difficult time foraging.
All of this means that women must be selective when choosing reproductive partners to maximize the likelihood of survival for her offspring.
A man on the other hand, carries almost no risk at all by engaging in reproduction.
A man is limited in his reproductive capability only by the number of women he has access to.
Theoretically a man can impregnate dozens of women in a single day.
The most successful conquerors in history had hundreds of children.
The investment of energy in the act of reproduction for men is so low that men are incentivized to do it as often as possible.
In short, men have evolved a strategy of quantity over quality when it comes to mate selection.
This supports the greater male variability hypothesis.
Men have evolved to be more varied and ambitious.
This is why men do more shit than women.
Men evolve diverse behaviors in an attempt to impress women.
Women select for men that are most likely to be able to provide for them.
On the simplest level this is simple physicality, but for discerning women it expands to wealth and intellect as well.
10/11/2025, 10:19:45 PM
No.518652304
[Report]
>>518652480
>>518652638
>>518653086
>>518653342
>>518653656
>>518653718
>>518654540
>>518654642
